AJIJfl47141tI
Special Publication 17
October 1988
OREGON
/
Li
jimber-Derived Revenues: Importance to
Local Governments in Oregon
(fiscal years 1982-83 through 1986-87)
Kevin Hackworth
Brian Greber
FOREIT REIEAPCH LAB
College of Forestry
Oregon State University
The Forest Research Laboratory of Oregon State University was established by the Oregon Legislature to conduct research leading to expanded
forest yields, Increased use of forest products, and accelerated economic
development of the State. Its scientists conduct this research In laboratories
and forests administered by the University and cooperating agencies and
Industries throughout Oregon. Research results are made available to
potential users through the University's educational programs and through
Laboratory publications such as this, which are directed as appropriate to
forest landowners and managers, manufacturers and users of forest products, leaders of government and Industry, the scientific community, and the
general public.
The Authors
Kevin Hackworth, formerly Graduate Research Assistant, Department
of Forest Management, Oregon State University, Corvallis, is now Management Forester, International Paper Company, Gardiner, OR. Brian Greber,
formerly Assistant Professor of Forest Economics, Department of Forest
Management, Oregon State University, Corvallis, is now associated with
Clear Pine Molding, Prineville, OR
Legal Notice
The Forest Research Laboratory at Oregon State University (OSU)
prepared this publication. Neither OSU nor any person acting on behalf of
such: (a) makes any warranty or representation, express or Implied, with
respect to the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of the Information
contained in this report; (b) claims that the use of any information or
method disclosed In this report does not infringe privately owned rights; or
(c)
assumes any liabilities with respect to the use of, or for damages
resulting from the use of, any Information, chemical, apparatus, or method
disclosed In this report.
Disclaimer
The mention of trade names or commercial products In this publication
does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
Acknowledgments
We wish to thank Kenneth Tollenaar, Bureau of Governmental Research, University of Oregon, and Frederick Kites, State of Oregon Department of Revenue, for their special assistance.
To Order Copies
Copies of this and other Forest Research Laboratory publications are
available from:
Forestry Business Office
College of Forestry
Oregon State University
Corvallis, Oregon 97331
Please include author(s), title, and publication number if known.
Timber-Derived Revenues: Importance to
Local Governments in Oregon
(fiscal years 1982-83 through 1986-87)
Kevin Hackworth
Brian Greber
Contents
1 Introduction
1 Background
1 Objectives
2 Forestry-Related Revenue Sources
2 Revenues from the Public Sector
2 National Forests
2 Land Administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
2 Oregon and California (O&C) Railroad Land
2 Coos Bay Wagon Roads
3 Payments in Lieu of Taxes
3 Public Domain Land
State Forests
County Forests
3 Revenues from the Private Sector
4 Severance Taxes
4 Real and Personal Property Taxes
4 Other Revenue Sources
3
3
4 Forest Fee and Yield Tax
4 Western Oregon Small-Tract Option
4 Forest Products Harvest Tax
5 Contributions of Timber-Derived Revenues to Local Governments
(Fiscal Years 1982-83 through 1985-86)
5 County Governments
6 Payments from the Public Sector
6 National Forest Revenue Sharing
6 Bureau of Land Management
7 State Forests
7 County Forests
7 Severance Taxes
7 School Districts
7 Payments from the Public Sector
National Forest Revenue Sharing
8 State Forests
7
8 Severance Taxes
9 Education Service Districts
9 Rural Fire Protection Districts
9 Road Districts
9 Contributions of Forestry-Related Firms to County Property Tax Receipts
(Fiscal 1986-87)
10 Sources and Treatment of Data
10 Contributions to Property Taxes
11 Discussion and Conclusions
13 Literature Cited
11
14 Appendix A. Formulas for Distribution of Severance Taxes
15 Appendix B. Summary Tables of Revenues from Forestry-Related Sources
15 Table B-i. Timber-derived revenues of county governments (average, fiscal years
1982-83 through 1985-86).
16 Table B-2. Percent of county government revenues derived from timber-related
sources (average, fiscal years 1982-83 through 1985-86).
17 Table B-3. Timber-derived revenues of school districts (average, fiscal years 1982-83
through 1985-86).
18 Table B-4. Percent of school district revenues derived from timber-related sources
(average, fiscal years 1982-83 through 1985-86).
18 Table B-5. Timber-derived revenues of education service districts (ESD's) (average,
fiscal years 1982-83 through 1985-86).
19 Table B-6. Timber-derived revenues of rural fire protection districts (RFPD's)
(average, fiscal years 1982-83 through 1985-86).
19 Table B-7. Timber-derived revenues of road districts (average, fiscal years 1982-83
through 1985-86).
20 Table B-8. Summary of timber-derived property taxes by county (fiscal 1986-87).
111
Introduction
Background
Local governments In Oregon traditionally
have depended heavily on revenues from forestryrelated activities on both private and public lands
(Gustaphson 1976). [For the purposes of this
study, local government is defined as any form of
government hierarchically smaller than the state
government and receiving at least part of Its funding from property taxes (i.e., tax districts). Cities.
county governments, school districts, and special
districts are examples of local governments. Much
of the revenue of local governments is tied directly
to timber harvest levels within the state, especially
harvests on national forest lands (administered by
I
the U.S. Forest Service) and Department of the
Interior lands (administered by the Bureau of Land
Management [BLMI). Several programs have been
set up to compensate local governments equitably
for property taxes foregone on government-owned
lands. The private sector also makes significant
payments to local governments, primarily as real
and personal-property taxes on forest land and
related capital, and severance and forest-products
taxes on timber harvests. These taxes come from
both industrial and nonindustrial forestry-related
sources, but most come from Industry.
Harvest levels varied widely from 1965 to
1985, with a general downward trend in harvest
volume (FIgure 1). Beuter eta! (1976) and Stere et
aL (1980) projected further declines In timber
harvests on both federal and private lands, and
indeed, recent Forest Service announcements
have proposed significant reduction In harvest
levels on national forests in Oregon. These forecasts have raised certain concerns within local
governments about potential budgetaiy problems
from reduced harvest-related payments. Reduced
harvest from federal land could put pressures on
local government budgets by reducing revenues,
both from private taxes and from public revenue
sharing and payments In lieu of taxes. Such
services of local governments as county road
maintenance, county-based law enforcement, and
school programs could be reduced as a result.
Alternatively, reduced harvest could lead to higher
tax rates on private property.
Objectives
Since private harvest levels have declined
steadily and harvests on national forests probably
will decline in the near future, a more specific
understanding of how harvest reductions will af-
fect revenues of Oregon local governments Is
needed. This study has two primary objectives:
(1) to extend the concept that government payments connected to forestry-related activities
contribute an important part of county government revenue to include other local governments
and other forestry-derived revenues; (2) to differen-
tiate between impact of reduced harvests on
county governments and those on other local governments (specifically school districts, education
service districts, rural fire protection districts, and
road districts).
Previous county revenue studies have dealt
with the fiscal impacts on county governments of
Oregon's timber industry and public land holdings. Some have interpreted these studies as
pertaining to all local government revenues. This
study will refer to the county as a whole (all local
governments within a county's borders) as the
"county," to the organization responsible for
county services as the "county government," and to
other local governments (e.g., school districts) by
TOTAL
2
DTOTALPRIVATE
OTOTALI-1ARVEST
0
IuI;IuuIIulIuIuIuup
965
1969
1973
1977
1981
1985
FIgure 1. Harvest levels on federal and private lands
(1965-85). Source: State of Oregon Department of Forestiy, Annual Harvest Reports.
type. To address our objectives, we have divided
the study into three parts: (1) a general description
of sources of forestry-related revenues; (2) analysis
of the average dependence of local governments on
severance tax offsets and nonlevied timber revenues in fiscal 1982-83 through 1985-86; (3) analysis of the contribution made by forestry-related
finns to county property taxes in fiscal 1986-87.
(The latter two parts could not be combined because of inavailability of comparable data.)
1
Forestry-Related Revenue Sources
Revenues from the
Public Sector
granted to the Oregon and California Railroad,
Sources and distribution of revenues from the
public sector are summarized In Table 1.
commerce and trade between California and the
Pacific Northwest. In 1937, these lands were
were to provide capital to hasten construction of a
railroad to aid in transportation and promote
forfeited to the government because of their ifiegal
National Forests
sale by the railroad, and their management re-
Oregon's 14 national forests contain over 15
million acres. In 1900, the U.S. Congress mandated that 25 percent of gross revenues derived
from national forests be paid to the counties in
proportion to the area of national forest lying
within each county (Nicholson and Tedder 1982).
The revenues that the county receives from this
program are earmarked for specific purposes: 75
percent must go to the county road fund, and the
remaIning 25 percent is placed In the county
school fund. Schools in Grant and Coos counties
can receive more than 25 percent of these payments, but tracing these additional school allocations Is difficult; this report addresses minimum
possible school allocations (25 percent) in these
two counties.
Land Administered by the Bureau of
Land Management (BLM)
Oregon and California (O&C) Railroad Land
There are about 2.5 million acres of "O&C"
verted to the General Land Office (precursor of the
BLM). A revenue-sharing formula was set up
stipulating that 50 percent of gross revenues generated on these lands were to be contributed to the
general funds of counties with O&C lands.
Coos Bay Wagon Roads
In 1869, the U.S. Congress granted the State
of Oregon land to build a military wagon road
between Coos Bay and Roseburg,1 under the same
conditions as O&C railroad land grants. Illegal
sales again led to reversion of the lands to the
federal government. In 1939, a program was set up
to compensate local governments for property
taxes foregone on these lands. These lands make
payments to county governments on a per-acre
basis rather than on the basis of the property tax
value of the land In a given year. This implies that
the payments are not truly In lieu of taxes, but
rather an annuity from the BLM to the county
land in Oregon, all of which are located west of the
government. Harvest revenues from this land are
used to compensate the two counties In which the
lands are located; payments equal the taxes that
Cascade Mountains.
'Act of March 3, 1869 (15 Stat. 340)
These lands, originally
Table 1. Summary of sources and distributions of timber-derived revenues from the public sector.
Agency/source
U.S. Forest Service
Bureau of Land Management
Oregon and California Railroad lands
Coos Bay Wagon Road lands
Payments in lieu of taxes
Public domain lands
State of Oregon
Retained land grants
Former county lands
County
County forests
2
Revenue formula
Distribution
25% of gross receipts
75% to county road fund
25% to county school fund
50% of gross harvest receipts
Property tax value of land
Per-acre payment
4% of net receipts, apportioned
on basis of county area
County general fund
Taxing units within the county
Taxing units within the county
Public roads and bridges
Interest earnings on invested
harvest revenues
All harvest receipts
Common school fund
All harvest receipts
County general fund
10.0% for management
67.5% to county tax districts
22.5% to county school fund
would have been paid if the land were privately
owned. Revenues are divided among the taxing
units within which the Coos Bay Wagon Road
lands are located, based on each unit's proportion
of the combined tax rate for the current year.
Payments in Lieu of Taxes
In 1976, a federal statut& created a new
federal payment system, Payments in Lieu of
Taxes." The payments are not, however, truly in
lieu of taxes, in that they are based on a per-acre
payment, not on foregone private property taxes
based on assessed values. Payments in lieu of
taxes generally apply to government lands that do
not fall under other special tax provisions.
State Forests
The State of Oregon administers about
786,000 acres of forest land. These lands originated from two separate sources. Some are from
retained land grants from the federal government;
revenues from this land go to a common school
fund. Most of the state forest land Is from former
county land; revenues from these lands are used
for management of the lands, county tax districts,
and county school funds.
County Forests
A few counties own and manage county forests. Revenues from this land go to the general
fund of the county that owns the land.
Public Domain Land
Public domain lands are former homestead
Revenues from the Private
Sector
lands in Oregon that are now under BLM manage-
ment. Receipts from these lands include Umber,
land, and material sales. Four percent of the net
receipts from these sources is paid to Oregon
counties; shares are based on the area of each
county. These funds are earmarked for construction and maintenance of public roads and bridges.
Some of the money derived from this land is from
forestry sources, but the exact amount was not
available and therefore could not be included in
this analysis.
Sources and distribution of revenues from the
private sector are summarized in Table 2.
Timber revenues from the private sector are
primarily from taxation of capital equipment, privately owned timber and the land upon which it
grows, and land owned by forestry-related firms
that Is classified as industrial on the county tax
rolls. Under current law, privately owned land and
2 Act of October 20, 1976 (90 Stat. 2662, PL94-565)
timber may be treated under one of several tax
systems, depending on size and geographic location of the resource.
Table 2. Summary of sources and distributions of timber-derived revenues from the private sector.
Source
Timber
System
Tax formula
Use of revenue
Western Oregon Severance Tax (WOST) 6.5% of harvest receipts'
Property tax offset
Eastern Oregon Severance Tax (EOST)
5.0% of harvest receipts'
Property tax offset
Forest fee and yield tax
Current 'phase-out" rate
Property tax offset
Forest products harvest tax
Cents per 1000 bd.
Forest Practices Act
ft.2
Forest research
Fire control
Real and personal property
Local property tax treatment
Value x tax rate
Regular tax revenue
Timber and land
Western Oregon Small Tract Option
Productivity value x tax rate
Regular tax revenue
2
See Appendix A for detailed formula.
Rates and apportionment are set every two years.
Severance Taxes
Under this system, timber and land are
Other Revenue Sources
tax system at a special reduced assessed value.
Severance taxes are used as a property tax offset
The revenue from the following sources was
not obtainable and therefore was not included in
the analysis. Their descriptions are included to
give a more complete picture of the full range of
private timber-related sources of revenue. The
contributions to the total revenues of local governments from these programs are relatively small
and should therefore not affect the findings to any
significant degree.
for local property tax levies. The offset payments
serve effectively as a private property tax payment
Forest Fee and Yield Tax
treated as separate entities. Timber is taxed at 6.5
percent of gross harvest receipts at the time of
harvest under the Western Oregon Severance Tax
(WOST) system and 5 percent under the Eastern
Oregon Severance Tax (EOST) system. Land is
taxed as real property under the normal property
and are treated as such in our description of
Importance to local governments.
The Timber Section of the State Department
of Revenue determines how much a county in
Areas designated as "reforestation lands" are
stifi treated under the old ad valorem tax system.
These lands are now being phased into the severance tax system. The rate at which harvests from
western Oregon will receive from the WOST program. The county then uses a district distribution
formula to offset the levies of its tax districts. The
these lands are taxed depends on the current
formulas used to calculate these payments (Appendix A) are based on 5-year harvest values and
forest land values in the county. Even If no timber
Western Oregon Small Tract Option
is harvested in a county in a given year, the county
could stifi receive a WOST payment. if timber had
been harvested In at least one of the previous four
years. This reduces fluctuation In payments over
time.
'phase out" rate.
If a tract of timber in western Oregon is 10 to
2,000 acres, the owner may have his forest property treated under the Western Oregon Small Tract
Option, rather than under the WOST system. This
tax is part of the local property tax system, with
both land and timber taxed on the basis of an
assigned productivity value of the land. The De-
The EOST program distributes payments to
counties by a much simpler formula (Appendix A)
based solely on 1964 appraised timber values.
Each county receives a share of net collections
based on its proportion of the total appraised value
of timber in eastern Oregon in 1964. The county
assessor allocates the amount of revenue certified
by the county treasurer to the districts. A paper
detailing these payment systems is available from
the State of Oregon Legislative Revenue Office
partment of Forestry determines the value at
which the property will be taxed; productivity
(1986b).
gon.
Real and Personal Property Taxes
Forest Products Harvest Tax
Forest industries are capital-intensive and
hold a relatively high proportion of the total assessed value of real and personal property in many
of the smaller forested counties. Many local governments rely on taxes on real (plant, equipment,
and land) and personal (nonfixed capital) property
of forest industries to provide a significant part of
The Forest Products Harvest Tax is collected at the time of harvest on both public and
private land. It is not shared with local governments. The revenues are dedicated for specific
purposes: implementation of the Forest Practices
Act, forest research, and emergency fire control.
The tax was 46 cents per thousand board feet in
their budgets.
fiscal 1986-87.
4
values varied from $3 to $229 per acre in 1986. The
State of Oregon Legislative Revenue Office (1 986a)
reported that only 186,219 acres were classified
under the Small Tract Optional Tax in 1986.
Estimated property tax payments for the 1985-86
fIscal year amounted to only about $300,000 statewide. Downing et aL (1976) have examined the
significance of small woodland ownership in Ore-
Contributions of Timber-Derived Revenues
to Local Governments (Fiscal Years 1982-83
through 1985-86)
Many of the county government
revenue data were obtained from the
Oregon County Finances (1983-
1985) publicatIons of the Bureau of
Government Research and Service at
the University of Oregon. Figures for
school district revenues were taken
CL1OLBIA
TILLAMOOK
WALLOWA
SHERMAN
PU______
MORROW
CLACKAMAS
YAMHILL
from the State of Oregon, Depart-
U U ATIL LA
HOOD
WASHINGTON
UNION
GILLIAM
________
WASCO
ment of Education publication,
BAKER
Audited Resources of
Oregon School Districts and ESDs
(1983-84 to 1985-86).
Summary
of
County
Governments
County governments provide
many services. They maintain
county-owned roads,3 administer
property tax collections and levy
submissions, provide law-enforce-
LN
JEFFERSO,..r:E
GRANT
DESCHUTES
0)0
MALHEUR
I
DOUGLAS
CURRY
JACKSON
HARNEY
KLAMATHh
LAKE
JOSEPHINE
ment services, administer extension
programs, and provide public and
mental health services and human
and community organization services. County governments also act as
intermediary In distribution of revenues from various revenue programs
I'll'
''I'll'''''
to tax districts in the county.
Individual county governments
vaiy in their dependence on timber-
related revenues for maintaining
these services, but all depend on
them at least to some degree (Figure
2; Appendix B, Tables B-i and B-2).
Typically, the amount of money a
county receives from timber-related
sources depends on how much of the
resource lies within that county's
borders and the value of the timber
harvested. In general, counties with
little or no forest land relative to their
total area (e.g.. Gilliam, Morrow, and
Sherman Counties) receive most of
their revenues from non-timber-related sources. Counties having pro-
PERCENT OF TOTAL CALCULATED REVENUE
D <1%
20-29%
o 1-4%
30-39%
0 10-19%
>50%
o
These should not be confused with road Figure 2. Percent of total county government revenue derived from
districts. Road districts operate on separate Umber-related sources (average, fiscal years 1982-83 through 1985-86;
budgets and submit lridMdual property-tax see Appendix B, Tables B-i and B-2, for detailed figures).
levies,
5
portionately more timberlands (e.g., Douglas,
Curry, Grant, and Tillamook) depend greatly in
most cases on revenues received from timberrelated sources. Of Oregon's 36 county governments. 25 depended on timber-related revenues
for at least 10 percent of their budget;
17 counties
depended on these payments for at least 20 per-
cent of their total revenue, and 9 counties depended on this source of revenue for 40 to 50
percent of their revenue (Figure 2, Table B-2).
Statewide, county governments depended on
timber-related payments for roughly 17 percent of
their total revenues (Table B-2). County governments relied on national forest revenue sharing for
about 8.4 percent of total revenues. This program
provided the most revenue of all programs, but use
of this revenue Is restricted. It therefore may not be
as valuable to the operation of the county governments as O&C revenues, which are placed in the
county general fund. Other programs are much
less significant statewide: none accounted for
more than 0.6 percent of total revenue, and combined they accounted for less than 2 percent.
Payments from the Public Sector
National Forest Revenue Sharing
National forest revenue-sharing payments
were the most important timber-related revenues
for county governments (Tables B-i, B-2). Grant
and Lake Counties depended on these payments
for nearly 50 percent of their total revenue, on the
average, between fiscal 1982-83 and 1985-86.
Thirteen other county governments depended on
national forest payments for at least 15 percent of
their revenues. The heavy reliance of some counties on revenue-sharing payments is of great significance when considering effects of reduced
harvest values from national forests. Those counties that have depended on national forest pay-
ments for at least 25 percent of their revenue
(Crook, Grant, Harney, Klamath, Lake, and
Wheeler) probably would be impacted the most by
harvest reduction. Since 75 percent of these
payments are earmarked for the county road fund,
upkeep and construction of county roads would
probably be affected first by a substantial reduction In harvest value. 11 funding for county roads
was kept at prereduction levels, other county serv-
ices would have to be reduced or county taxes
would have to be increased.
Bureau of Land Management
O&C Payments
Currently, payments from harvests on O&C
lands provide a large part of the financing for
county governments (Tables B-i, B-2). The O&C
payments also can be distributed by the county
government to school districts within the county.
To determine howmuch of the O&C payments was
used for school districts and how much was available for county government use, we subtracted
payments earmarked for schools from state trust
lands and national forest revenue-sharing from
the county government's total payments to school
districts. The remainder was then deducted from
total O&C payments. Realistically, the amount
subtracted from O&C revenue Is overstated. These
calculations were performed to demonstrate the
Importance of the O&C revenue to county governments even If the county government payments to
schools were taken from O&C funds. They represent a minimum payment from the viewpoint of the
county government's ability to utilize O&C payments for its own expenses.
Of the 18 county governments receiving
payments from O&C lands, 7 received 12 percent
of their total revenue from O&C payments (Tables
B-i, B-2). Douglas County averaged about $11.7
millIonabout 30 percent of total revenuesover
the period. Jackson County averaged over $8
million and Lane County over $7 million from O&C
payments. about 36 and 12 percent of total
revenue, respectively.
Josephine County
government received about 42 percent of its
revenue from this source. The precise impact of
changes in these revenues is difficult to discern,
since they go into the county general fund and can
be used as seen fit by the county government. It is
likely, however, that reduced O&C payments
would lead to either a decline in services paid for
out of county general funds, an increase In
property taxes, or both.
Coos Bay Wagon Road
Only Coos and Douglas counties receive this
payment. Payments to the county government
itself are not very substantial, since most of these
revenues are passed through to schools and other
taxing districts.
Payments in Lieu of
Taxes
BLM payments in lieu of taxes accounted for
less than 1 percent of total net revenue for the
majority of county governments (Tables B-i, B-2).
Five counties, however, depended on these payments for at least 3 percent of total net revenue, Of
these, Maiheur, Lake, and Harney Counties received, on average, about 5.2 percent, 6.4 percent,
and 8.9 percent of total net revenue, respectively,
from this program. This Is not surprising, since
these counties have rather small populations and
contain the largest acreages of BLM land under
this program.
Sh'1 D
A
'
School districts may obtain money directly
from several timber-related sources: national forest revenue-sharing, state forest lands, and severance taxes (Figure 3; Tables B-3, B-4). School
districts may also receive funds, Including reve-
nues from O&C timberlands, from the county
general fund.
For this study, the finances of all school
State Forests
Most of the revenue acquired from state forest
lands Is channeled to other local governments and
does not generally affect the operation of county
governments. State forest revenues were therefore
excluded from total revenue for all but Clatsop
County, which apparently relies to a substantial
degree upon revenues from former county land. if
state forest revenues are removed from the Clatsop
County county government budget, a deficit results. Payments that Clatsop County made to
other local governments from this source could not
be determined; hence, the percent of the total
revenue of the county government is somewhat
overstated. The minimum possible payment to
districts within each county were assembled into a
county-wide summaly. The relative Importance of
timber revenues was expressed as a proportion of
revenue newly acquired by schools during the
fiscal year. Newly acquired revenues were used for
simplicity; previously acquired revenues remained
fairly constant each year over the study period.
Thus, the percentages expressed in Table B-4 are
for the county school districts as a whole and may
not describe exactly the relative importance of specific timber payments to an individual school district within the county.
Although state forest contributions and O&C
funds were not included In the evaluation of total
timber contribution, the contribution from timber-
schools was deducted, however, to provide a closer
estimate of the true contribution to total revenue.
related sources was still quite substantial for
County Forests
were used to estimate maximum payments for
schools, O&C funds would contribute from 0 to
Many counties own forests, but only two
relied on them for substantial revenue. This
revenue was especially Important to Hood River
County, contributing over 1 mIllion dollars annually to the county general fund over the period and
accounting for nearly 35 percent of the county's
total revenues. Revenues to Coos County from
county forests accounted for almost 12 percent of
the total county government revenue. Since these
revenues accrue to the county general fund, it is
again difficult to predict the precise impact on
county government expenditures and tax rates.
Severance Taxes
Severance taxes (EOST and WOST offset
payments) did not contribute substantially to the
revenues of any county governments. Tillamook,
Lincoln, and Columbia counties received roughly
2 to 3 percent of their revenues through the WOST
program. In most counties severance taxes accounted for less than 1 percent of total revenue.
Sherman County received no severance taxes over
the period.
school districts In some counties. if the O&C minimum payments procedure for county governments
2.75 percent of school funds (Tables B-3, B-4).
On a statewide basis, dependence of schools
on severance tax and national forest payments was
quite small, about 2.7 percent. Statewide averages
can be misleading, however, because counties differ greatly In population and dependence on tim-
ber-derived revenues. The more populated but
less timber-dependent school districts have very
large budgets relative to the smaller, more timber-
dependent districts. Thus, saying that Oregon
school districts obtained about 2.7 percent of total
annual revenue from forest-related sources does
not accurately describe the dependence of individual school districts, which ranged from 21 percent
in Lake County to less than
1
percent in
Multnomah and other counties.
Payments from the Public Sector
National Forest Revenue Sharing
The national forest payment to schools was
calculated as 25 percent of the national forest
payment to each county. (Because Grant and Coos
7
Counties are allowed to disperse more than 25
percent of these payments to schools, the payments calculated for those counties should be
Dependence of school districts on national
forest revenue-sharing payments ranged from
viewed as minimum possible payments.
national forest land to about 16 percent In Lake
o percent of the budget In counties with utile or no
Cr11t,hT
tii1
1 7 i
pr)1
in
C_r,rf
County, which contain extensive
national forest acreage (Tables B-3,
B-4). Crook, Harney, Kiarnath, and
CLATSOP COLUMBIA
RWERMAN
WAaoWA
1LLAMOOK
CLACKAMAS>J4JORROWl 4UNON\
VAMLL
LBR(XN
URN
JEFFERSON
WHEELER
GRANT
,._rL_
BENT
/
/
DESCHUTES
CCOS
MALHEUR
oijcts
HARNEY
f
CURRY
JACKSON
KLAMATH
State Forests
Since amounts of payments
from state forests were not avail-
able, minimum payments were
again estimated to permit some
CRCOK
LANE
Wheeler counties received at least
5 percent of school-district revenues from this source.
LAKE
JOSEPHINE
understanding of the Impacts that
payments from this source have on
school revenue. The minimum
payment to schools was assumed to
be 22.5 percent of revenue from
state forests in each county. Clatsop and Tillamook counties depended most on these payments.
which contributed about 7 and 3.5
percent of newly acquired school
revenue, respectively.
Severance Taxes
Inmost Eastern Oregon school
districts, EOST payments ac-
counted for less than 1 percent of
revenue. About 5.6 percent of Lake
County school-district revenues
were made up of EOST payments,
by far the highest amount received
from this program.
WOST payments made up
proportionately more of western
Oregon school revenues than did
PERCENT OF TOTAL CALCULATED REVENUE
<1% [310-14%
o 1-4% [3 15-19%
20-25%
0 5-9
FIgure 3. Percent of total school district revenues from timber-related
sources (average, fiscal years 1982-83 through 1985-86: see Appendix B,
Tables B-3 and B-4. for detailed figures).
EOST payments of eastern Oregon
school revenues. The smaller, more
populated counties received rela-
less in WOST payments.
Costs of operating these school
tively
districts tend to be relatively high,
but greater nontlmber tax-base resources are available in the metropolitan areas in which they are lo-
cated; thus severance taxes are
proportionately less important.
Counties with large annual private
harvest levels, such as Coos and Douglas. receive
proportionately more from WOST payments than
do counties with smaller private harvest levels.
Douglas County schools received a little more than
10 percent of their revenues from this source.
Coos, Clatsop, Lincoln, and Tillamook Counties
averaged at least 5 percent of annual newly acquired revenue from WOST offsets.
Education Service Districts
Education service districts (ESD's) provide a
variety of services to school districts, such as
special education services, payroll accounting,
grade reports, and workshops for teachers and
administrators. Most funding for the 29 ESD's in
Oregon comes from federal and state grant funds.
They also submit a levy and receive property tax
money. In addition, ESD's receive severance taxes
through EOST or WOST (Table B-5). For the
purposes of this study, the Llnn-Benton ESD was
split into Llnn and Benton sections so that the
contribution from severance taxes was clearer;
differences were caused by disparity in private
timber harvests.
The ESD's in Wheeler and Lake County were
the only ones to receive a substantial portion of
their revenues from EOST payments: total revenue
from this source averaged about 13 and 7 percent,
respectively. EOST payments accounted for less
than 5 percent of the total revenue In each of the
other eastern Oregon counties over the period.
Averaged over eligible and ineligible districts,
EOST payments made up less than 1 percent of
total annual ESD revenue.
Western Oregon ESD's depended more on
severance payments, which accounted for an average of almost 6 percent of total annual revenue.
Clatsop and Douglas County ESD's depended
most on this source of revenue, with WOST payments making up about 15 and 14 percent of their
total revenue, respectively. Curry and Polk County
ESD's relied on these payments for at least 10
percent of their total annual revenue. Other ESD's
showing substantial WOST payments relative to
total revenue over the period were Coos (9 percent),
Llnn (5 percent), and Tifiamook (7 percent). Western Oregon ESD's relied on these payments for an
average of about 2 percent of total annual revenue.
Rural Fire
Protection Districts
Rural fire protection districts (RFPD's) can
receive revenue from several sources, but their
primary source of funding Is property tax appropriations. Non-severance-tax offsets were extremely small in relation to the total levies of the
RFPD's (Table B-6). Reliance on severance tax
payments Is expressed as the ratio of these payments to the total property tax levy for all RFPD's
In the county. Eastern Oregon RFPD's received
very little of their property tax revenue from the
EOST program. In fact, the offset amounts made
up less than 1 percent of property tax payments in
every case where severance tax offsets were made.
The situation for western Oregon county RFPD's
was much the same, although the contribution by
WOST was somewhat larger. Only Columbia and
Tillamook Counties showed any substantial contribution from WOST payments, with about 3 and
4.5 percent of their tax revenues from the WOST
program, respectively. WOST and EOST tax offsets
made up less than 1 percent of Oregon's RFPD
property tax revenues statewide.
Road Districts
Road districts throughout the state received
very little In severance tax payments relative to
property tax revenues (Table B-7). Only Clatsop
County, In which WOST payments made up more
than 18 percent of the total property tax revenue,
received any substantial payment from severance
taxes for operation of road districts.
Contributions of Forestry-Related Firms to
County Property Tax Receipts (Fiscal 1986-87)
Determining contributions of forestry-related
activities to property taxes is difficult, because of
land classification differences by different counties
and the sheer volume of property tax accounts
related to forestry. Once the contribution Is deter-
mined, assessments can be made of potential
effects on property tax revenues if variation in
harvest levels encourages or discourages investment In forest enterprises in the area. If harvest
patterns reduce investments In forestry Industry,
assessed worth of forest industry property will be
reduced. Reduction in cumulative property value
In a county will, in turn, Increase the tax burden of
every taxpayer whose property value did not declime.
Sources and Treatments
of Data
Severance tax and total property tax Information were obtained from the 1986-87 Oregon Property Tax Statistics Supplements published by the
State of Oregon Department of Revenue. Real and
personal property tax accounts were identified
from tax-office records for each county for the
1986-87 tax year. Forestry-related firms (Standard
IndustrIal Classification 24 or 26, U.S. Goverment
Printing Office, 1972) payIng 17 or more employees
were identified through the Oregon Directory of
Manufacturers (State of Oregon, Economic Development Office, 1985) and the county tax offices.
Firms employing fewer than 17 employees tended
to be Independently owned logging companies.
million In Multnomah County. The property tax
contribution from forestry-related sources Is substantial in most counties (Figure 4, Table B-8).
Severance taxes are treated as property tax
offsets by the counties receiving these funds.
Property tax offsets from the WOST program In
1986-87 averaged $1,681,219 per county. The
amounts paid to individual counties, however,
ranged from $87,418 In Hood River County to over
$7 million In Douglas County. Property tax offsets
from the EOST program averaged $206,425; payments ranged from $6 lOin Malheur County to over
$2.5 million In Klamath County. Even Gilliam
County, which has no forest land value, received
an EOST payment. Douglas County received more
in severance tax payments in proportion to total
county levies than any other county in the state.
The more populated western and the nonlorested
eastern counties relied less on severance tax payments. Severance tax payments offset at least 6
percent of the total levy In seven western Oregon
Real property taxes collected from both
industrial and nonindustrial forest land were cal-
counties and about 5 percent or more in three
culated from the forest land value and the consoli-
Property tax revenues from forest land itself
did not account for more than 2 percent of the total
levy in any county In the state, with the exception
of Wheeler County (Figure 4). Payments from this
dated tax rate within the tax code areas of each
county. These calculations yield the property tax
contribution from forest lands on which the timber
is being treated under a severance tax system; they
do not include the contributions from forest lands
currently designated as agricultural or recreational land or the contributions from the Western
Oregon Small Tract Option tax program. Real and
personal property tax data were not available for
Klamath County and forest land tax data were not
available for Yamhlll County. Property taxes received from forest land for some counties overlap
with the real property taxes collected from forestry
firms, i.e., the land taxes paid by firms have not
been subtracted from the real property taxes (those
counties are Identified in Table B-8). Since the
payments, for the most part, are small relathre to
total property taxes collected by each county, we
felt that the overlap Is not great enough to distort
the findings.
eastern counties (Figure 4).
source averaged $261,640, ranging from $0 In
Sherman and Gilliam Counties to about $1.6 million in Lane County.
Revenues from timber-related personal property were fairly small. Revenues from this source
averaged about $150,000 and ranged from $0 in
three counties to about $1 million in Lane County
(Table B-8). The maximum contribution of personal property taxes to the total levy of any county
was 1.7 percent. In fact, contributions from this
source accounted for less than 1 percent of the
total levy In all but Douglas, Harney and Wasco
Counties. Personal property taxes probably would
be more substantial If one could account for the
many logging contractors that the data did not
include.
Contributions to
Property Taxes
Real property tax contributions, unlike those
from personal property taxes, tended to make up a
Total property levies averaged about $54
million dollars in the 1986-87 tax year, ranging
from $957,346 In Wheeler County to over $479
ments for timber-related firms came to about
10
significant portion of total levies in a number of
counties. On average, real property tax assess-
$1.16 million, about 3 percent of the total levy.
Assessments ranged from $0 in Gilliam, Sherman
25
>
'
I
20
FOREST LAND
REAL
IPERSONAL
OWOST
15
0 EOST
FIgure 4. Property tax contribution to counties from timber-related sources, 1986-87 tax year.
and Wheeler Counties to almost $12 million in
Lane County. Real property tax assessments of
over $4 million In Clatsop County and almost
$3 million in Columbia County translated to over
14 and 11 percent, respectively, of the total levy In
those counties. Real property taxes accounted for
about 8 percent of the total levy In Crook and
Harney Counties and at least 6 percent of total
levies In Grant, Lane, Linn and Union Counties.
Severance taxes, land taxes, and real and
personal property taxes combined account for a
very significant portion of property tax levies (Figure 4, Table B-8). The more forested counties
receive a proportionately larger contribution from
these sources. The average amount received from
these timber-related sources was about $1.5 million, or about 7 percent of the average county's
total tax levy. This varied greatly from county to
county, however; timber-related contributions
ranged from 0 to over 23 percent of total county
tax levies. Tax revenue from timber-related
sources accounted for 23.1 and 21.2 percent,
respectively, of the total levies in Clatsop and
Columbia Counties. These counties received, pro-
portionately. the most from these sources.
Douglas County, the third highest, received almost
19 percent of its levy from timber-related firms and
timberlands. Ten percent or more of the total tax
levies of 13 counties was met by forestry sources,
and 18 counties relied on these sources for at least
6 percent of the total tax levy.
Statewide taxation of private forestry-related
entities was estimated to account for about
4.6 percent of all property tax levies. The estimate
rises to 6 percent If Multnomah County Is removed
from the analysis and to about 7 percent if Washington County is also removed. This is, however,
an underestimate, since real (excluding timber
land) and personal property taxes paid by private
forestry-related firms in Kiamath County and
property tax revenues from forest lands with timber treated under WOST In Yamhffl County were
not included. Also not included were tax revenues
from owners with timberlands treated under the
Western Oregon Small Tract Option, and real or
personal taxes assessed to small, privately owned,
forestry-related firms.
Discussion and Conclusions
Of the local governments studied, county
5). National forest and O&C payments to counties
governments and school districts depended most
on timber-related revenues. Such revenues provided from 0.1 to 37.8 percent of combined county
government and school-district revenues (Figure
were the most Important timber payments to
county governments and schools. The impact of
reducing national forest harvests could extend
beyond reduction of school revenue and road
11
maintenance and construction, if a county has to
redirect funding from other sources to maintain
those programs. The Importance of O&C revenue
cannot be assessed so easily, since the money goes
Into the county general fund and, forthe most part,
can be disbursed to other local governments within
the county or retained by the county government
for its own uses. Thus, O&C money may be an
Important source of funding for a program in one
county but may be used totally differently In another. The Important consideration is not necessarily how the money is used, but where program
funding would come from If O&C money were not
available.
Severance taxes made up very little of the
total revenue of the local governments examined,
except In certain school districts. Severance taxes
from the EOST program made up very little of total
school district revenues in all eastern Oregon
counties but Lake County. WOST payments to
western Oregon school districts, on the other
hand, made up over 5 percent of the total annual
revenues received for five school districts In western counties.
Timber-related firms bore a very significant
portion of the property tax burden in many coun-
ties during the 1986-87 tax year. Western and
highly forested counties with higher timber-related industrial bases tended to assess a higher
proportion of their levy against timber-related
firms and to rely on property tax payments from
these firms for a substantial contribution to opera-
tion of local governments. If It were not for these
finns, financial support of local governments
probably would have to be spread out across
property-tax payers through higher tax rates. The
primary contributors from private finns were by far
the large corporations. Payments by smaller finns
were dwarfed by the enormous amount of taxes
paid by the two largest contributing companies,
each of which paid more than all other finns
combined in their respective counties.
When estimating the impact of changes in
harvest levels on local governments, one should
keep in mind that harvest value, not volume,
ultimately determines the payments from these
lands. Although closely related, they are not the
same. For example, national forest harvest volumes might be reduced but harvest values maintained If stumpage prices increased enough to
compensate for the reduced volume. Thus, although payments to counties and schools probably would decline given a substantial reduction in
harvest levels on national forests or O&C lands, the
amount of that reduction can only be assessed
after the market has adjusted to reduced stumpage supply. Answers to questions such as, "How
much would harvest levels have to be reduced
before significant impacts would be felt by the
counties?" are difficult and would depend on the
county arid the ability of the county governments
to find alternative sources of revenue.
This analysis does not fully reflect the contribution of forestry to Oregon's local governments.
40
Figure 5. Contribution of timber-related revenues to combined county government and school districtrevenues, fiscal
years 1982-83 through 1985-86. (These figures do not Include property tax payments from forestry-related firms.)
12
The local governments Included are those that
receive the most timber-related revenue. City
Cycling of income taxes through state and
governments, community colleges, and other tax-
federal governments to local governments provides
further support to local governments. Since forest
Ing districts were omitted from the analysis. In
addition, property taxes paid by forestry-related
industry and its employees pay a significant
amount of income tax in the state, one cannot
firms were not added to the percent-of-total tables
(Tables B-2, B-4. AppendIx 2). These payments
dismiss this contribution to local government finances. Difficulties In tracing the flow of income
probably make up a substantial portion of the
taxes, however, precludes assessment of this
revenues of local governments.
contribution In the current analysis.
Literature Cited
BEUTER, J.H., K.N. JOHNSON. and H.L.
STATE OF OREGON, DEPARTMENT OF REVE-
SCHEURMAN. 1976. TImber for Oregon's tomor-
NUE. Fiscal 1982 to 1986. Oregon Property Tax
Statistics. Fiscal years 1982-83 to 1986-87. Sa-
row: an analysis of reasonably possible occurrences. Forest Research Laboratory, Oregon State
University, Corvallis. Research Bulletin 19.
111 p.
BUREAU OF GOVERNMENTAL RESEARCH AND
SERVICE. 1983 to 1986. Oregon County Fi-
nances. University of Oregon, Eugene.
DOWNING. K.B., K.P. CONNAUGHTON, and W.S.
HOPKINS. 1976. Urban owners of forests In
western Oregon. Forest Research Laboratory,
Oregon State University, Corvallis. Research
Paper 26. 11
p.
lem, Oregon.
STATE OF OREGON, DEPARTMENT OF REVE-
NUE. 1982 to 1986. Oregon Property Tax Statistics. Statistical Supplement. Fiscalyears 1982-83
to 1986-87. Salem, Oregon.
STATE OF OREGON, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OFFICE. 1985. Directory of Manufacturers. Economic Development Department, Salem,
Oregon. 410 p.
GUSTAPHSON, RD. 1976. Regional employment
impact on timber harvest changes in Oregon. M.S.
thesis, Oregon State University, Corvallis. 154 p.
STATE OF OREGON, LEGISLATiVE REVENUE
OFFICE. 1986a. Revenue from Timber in Oregon.
Salem, Oregon. Research Report 6-86. 8 p.
NICHOLSON, W.E. and P.L. TEDDER 1982. Joint
timber-harvest scheduling by the U.S. forest service and the Bureau of Land Management: possible
STATE OF OREGON, LEGISLATIVE REVENUE
effects on harvest levels and county revenues in
western Oregon. Forest Research Laboratory,
Oregon State University, Corvallis. Research
Bulletin 37. 41 p.
OFFICE. 1986b. Distribution of Oregon Timber
SeveranceTax Receipts. Salem, Oregon. Research
Report 6-86. 8 p.
TION. 1983 to 1986. Summary of Audited Resources of Oregon School Districts and ESDs.
Fiscal years 1982-83 to 1985-86. Salem, Oregon.
STERE, D.H., B.R HOPPS, and G. LETFMAN.
1980. 1980 Oregon timber supply assessment:
projections of future available harvests. Forest
Research Planning Section, Oregon State Forestry
Department, Salem. 165 p.
STATE OF OREGON, DEPARTMENT OF FOR-
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. 1972.
STATE OF OREGON, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCA-
ESTRY. 1965 to 1985. Annual Harvest Reports.
Mimeo. Salem, Oregon.
Standard Industrial Classification Manual.
649 p.
13
Appendix A. Formulas for
Distribution of Severance Taxes
WOST
\
County harvest
value (5-year avg.)
County harvest
distribution
(75% of net)
Western Oregon avg. I
harvest value
/
County forest
land value
County land
distribution
Western Oregon
forest land value
k
c011eCtions
(25% of net
collections
Total county distribution = County harvest distribution + County land distribution
I
District harvest
distribution
\
Avg. harvest value ( Avg. tax
of district
/ rate (district)J
)
(Sum of avg. harvest'I' Avg. tax
value in county )lrate (county)) /
Land value (Avg. tax
in district / \ rate I
District land
distribution
(county sum of\ (Avg. taxi
land value
)
O county
distribution /
'(25% of county i
) \ distribution /
//
rate
Total district distribution = District harvest distribution + District land distribution
EOST
County
=
distribution
I Appraised timber value
in county (1964)
I
net collections
I
Eastern Oregon appraised
timber value (1964)
\
District
distribution
14
District-computed
property tax on timber
County sum of
computed tax on timber
I
/
county
t,distribution)
Table 8-1. Timber-derived revenues of county governments (average, fiscal years 1982-1983 through 1985-86).
County
Baker
Benton
Clackamas
Clatsop
Columbia
Coos
Crook
Curry
Deschutes
Douglas
Gilliam
Grant
Harney
HoodRiver
Jackson
Jefferson
Josephine
Klamath
Lake
Lane
Lincoln
Linn
Malheur
Marion
Morrow
Multnomah
Polk
Sherman
National
forest
paymentst
$562,710
164,529
2,512,924
0
0
O&C payments and reserves
Maximum
Total
possible
Minimum
payment
to schools reservest
$0
1,508,114
2,978,659
$0
1,250,954
502,066
$0
257,160
2,476,593
0
0
0
1,105,592
3,166,502
599,483
268,532
506,109
2,897,970
0
0
1,958,938
352,656
0
1,606,282
0
0
233,606
1,249,925
1,521,087
3,163,055
6,212,429
13,444,215
0
0
0
2,359,838
1,275,016
804,532
2,394,558
545,386
859,398
5,734,296
2,874,090
10,732,094
1,727,476
3,641,382
3,748
1,393,148
156,498
355,910
0
0
0
0
0
0
8,410,014
394,488
0
1,792,981 11,651,234
0
0
0
0
8,015,526
0
0
0
6,483,278
1,255,867
175,925
5,094
6,307,353
1,250,773
0
0
0
8,195,336
193,210
1,416,875
811,223
193,210
485,319
7,384,113
0
0
163,020
0
0
931,556
0
3,211
783,575
0
637,214
1,159,262
637,214
178,042
0
0
0
Tillamook
934,347
Umatilla
432,484
Union
506,128
Wallowa
815,821
Wasco
1,026,065
Washington
0
Wheeler
411,607
Yamhlll
256,849
Total forstate 54,864,141
0
300,549
28,169
272,380
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
338,116
223,467
0
0
114,649
0
0
386,421
53,721,734
0
620,555
0
0
981,220
111,673
274,748
8,173,516 45,548,218
Payments
in lieu
of taxest
$108,106
1,918
48,451
299
0
County
forestst
$4,099
0
290,257
0
529
6,452 1,542,551
89,263
0
55,901
0
136,756
0
91,593
169,733
6,860
0
164,075
0
310,824
0
19,911 1,315,043
44,217
0
27,211
0
33,409
448,520
202,550
0
310,824
0
129,910
12
17,299
0
45,565
0
416,902
0
19,399
0
17,697
0
6,803
0
0
0
17,178
0
9,961
0
43,750
0
83,389
0
110,181
0
19,420
25
273
25,075
24,219
0
2,530
83
2,623,089 3,795,927
EOST*t
WOST
$9,510
$0
42,367
120,823
240,506
182,666
261,752
Total timber
contribution
Estimate
of total
revenue
$684,425 $3,479,187
465,972 12,584,185
5,449,046 70,752,900
0
5,782,741k 10,645,200
0
689,304
5,898,683
0
4,942,331
13,070,693
10,484
0 1,349,671
4,275,848
0
34,302 3,217,571
6,990,351
9,587
0 3,309,398
16,549,466
0
542,834 18,667,822 39,962,874
136
0
6,996
3,355,452
18,326
0
2,542,239
4,805,248
1,734
0
1,587,574
4,838,614
0
15,440 2,154,925
3,809,509
0
39,974 10,494,275 22,534,632
10,016
0
582,612
3,309,624
0
2,377 7,651,057
15,059,280
106,959
0 7,294,578
18,438,385
80,330
0 3,265,243
5,999,484
0
393,514 18,639,642 62,394,461
0 321,694 2,066,469
11,673,542
0
422,953 5,041,456 15,844,122
86
0
420,735
4,691,568
0
58,579 2,091,680 34,905,147
22,339
0
196,534
5,397,010
0
33,668
396,381 133,191,142
0
129,514 1,113,944
7,131,948
0
0
17,178
1,382,543
0
181,381
1,398,069
6,783,691
12,644
0
488,877
8,310,388
18,370
0
607,887
4,485,565
19,446
0
945,448
5,081,434
8,586
0
1,054,096
7,203,388
0
71,269
211,265 6.4,643,425
10,445
0
446,271
1,074,289
0
78,552
612,761
8,753,005
338,997 3,174,161110,344,534 649,306,281
0
0
Source: Oregon County Finances, Bureau of Governmental Research and Service, University of Oregon (1983-86).
* Source: Oregon Property Tax Statistics, Statistical Supplement, State of Oregon, Department of Revenue (1982-86).
tlliJJed in calculation of total timber contribution.
C1
* Clatsop County was unusually dependent on revenues from the state forests; therefore, these revenues were included in the total timber contribution for this
county
only. See text for details.
II
0
Cl)
I
- II
0
Cl)
Table B-2. Percent of county government revenues derived from timber-related sources (average, fiscal years 1982-83 through 1985-86).
0)
County
Baker
Benton
Clackamas
Clatsop
Columbia
Coos
Crook
Curry
Deschutes
Douglas
Gilliam
Grant
Hamey
HoodRiver
Jackson
Jefferson
Josephine
Klamath
Lake
Lane
Lincoln
Llnn
Malheur
Marion
Morrow
Multnomah
Polk
Sherman
Tlllamook
Umatilla
Union
Wallowa
Wasco
Washington
Wheeler
Yamhill
StatewIde
National
Forest
payments
Minimum
O&C
reserves
Payments
in lieu
of taxes
County
forests
EOST
WOST
16.17
0
3.11
0.12
0.27
0
1.31
3.55
2.04
3.50
0
0
1.79
0.02
0.07
0
8.58
22.17
0
0
0
0
0
0.34
0.17
2.26
3.10
2.00
29.23
21.76
22.98
0
0.41
0
0.01
11.80
0
0
0
0
0
19.11
0
15.55
29.16
0
0
0
49.11
26.35
21.12
10.63
16.48
5.71
31.10
47.91
17.20
14.80
22.98
0.08
3.99
2.90
0.27
0.05
0.00
13.77
5.20
11.28
16.05
14.24
0
38.31
2.93
8.45
0
0.05
2.09
0.80
0.83
0.23
0.20
3.41
0
6.42
0.52
0.20
0.82
0.22
1.10
5.18
11.83
0.21
0
0.15
0.29
8.89
0.06
0.33
0
0
35.57
0
41.88
6.78
5.88
0
1.78
0
0
13.76
0
4.02
0
0
0
0
0.18
0
3.14
7.01
0.42
0
0
0
0.25
0
0
0.49
0.00
1.36
0.06
0
0
0.38
0.04
0.21
52.91
32.81
0.30
0
56.57
46.57
17.60
2.98
0
0.02
50.81
0
0.58
1.34
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.41
0
0
0
0
0.63
2.76
2.67
39.56
54.43
29.87
17.70
31.82
8.97
5.99
3.64
0.30
15.62
1.24
0.15
0
0
0
0
0.11
0
0
0
2.17
0.27
0
0.04
0
2.25
0.03
0.40
0
0
0.58
0.97
1.24
0.15
0.53
1.86
19.67
3.70
7.70
54.32
11.69
37.81
31.56
46.03
20.00
46.71
0
0
34.52
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.01
0
0
0
0
0.41
Total
timber
contribution
0.41
0.38
0.12
0
0.05
0.18
0
0.17
0
0.03
1.82
0.00
2.67
0.90
0.49
20.61
5.88
13.55
18.61
14.63
0.33
41.54
7.00
16.99
Table B-3. Timber-derived revenues of school districts (average, fiscal years 1982-83 through 1985-86).
County
Baker
Benton
Clackamas
Clatsop
Columbia
Coos
Crook
Curry
Deschutes
Douglas
GIlliam
Grant
Hamey
HoodRiver
Jackson
Jefferson
JosephIne
Klamath
Lake
Lane
Lincoln
Linn
Malheur
Marion
Morrow
Multnomah
Polk
Sherman
Tillamook
UmatIlla
Union
Wallowa
Wasco
Washln9ton
Wheeler
Yamhill
Total for State
National
forest
payments
EOST*
WOST
$0
251,127
947,714
1,248,659
1,463,273
2,648,797
$0
191,887
6,248
1,608,949
107,465
49,411
63,293
0
0
439,835
0
0
$187,570
54,843
$37,669
837,641
46,259
0
0
0
0
0
77,869
416,642
507,029
1,054,352
2,070,810
0
991,338
425,005
268,177
798,186
181,795
286,466
1,911,432
958,030
3,577,365
575,825
1,213,794
1,249
464,383
52,166
118,637
1,070
0
311,449
144,161
168,709
271,940
342,022
0
137,202
85,616
18,492,772
Estimated
minimum
payment from
state forests
0
48,658
0
0
0
6,242,083
594
21,548
1,796
0
0
0
32,116
0
0
0
127,874
1,064,135
28,390
0
0
145,587
0
0
4,238,686
1,148,973
3,238,133
0
322,420
584,992
338,806
0
0
0
813
0
41,892
0
0
0
139,670
871,600
0
893,765
0
0
0
79,764
103,140
30,072
41,475
0
23,144
0
1,492,303
0
0
0
0
0
162
88,066
0
190,007
259,662
123,189
0
196,762
0
0
85,038
0
485,748
Total timber
contribution
$225,239
497,857
1,837,862
2,857,608
1,570,737
2,776,077
479,935
946,864
1,103,010
8,345,008
594
1,012,886
426,801
396,052
1,862,321
210,185
432,215
2,584,490
1,296,836
8,006,057
1,984,460
4,575,116
2,062
983,564
94,058
258,306
957,708
0
0
0
0
0
0
413,917
158,383
0
0
0
0
1,690,961
223,926
271,849
302,012
383,496
572,300
160,346
566,131
3,583,094
49,894,927
0
480,514
26,326,758
School district
revenue
received
during year
$10,097,802
39,236,165
178,382,595
22,593,238
36,525,798
42,079,986
8,313,338
9,939,906
44,642,592
61,605,943
2,133,813
5,746,098
6,612,009
11,288,424
89,827,236
10,895,151
35,121,244
34,448,306
6,072,912
174,865,011
22,550,892
66,040,184
18,854,198
142,886,746
8,279,844
438,818,935
20,456,119
2,434,953
14,178,288
41,974,753
17,763,549
5,783,278
16,188,215
180,427,860
1,787,145
39,712,259
1,868,564,781
Prior
year's taxes
$335,673
2,315,970
9,670,872
875,012
1,383,694
2,503,300
497,866
793,171
4,076,207
2,840,399
94,841
50,515
86,591
472,515
4,932,879
453,001
1,906,965
1,347,661
252,681
12,230,265
2,033,189
3,874,657
740,821
6,336,502
256,708
14,309,113
1,074,257
60,798
823,618
1,949,392
726,976
73,763
872,316
10,371,300
7,484
1,968,184
92,599,151
Source: Summary of Audited Resources of Oregon School Districts and ESDs, State of Oregon, Departmentof Education (1983-86).
* Source: Oregon Property Tax Statistics, Statistical Supplement, State of Oregon, Department of Revenue (1982-86).
Beginning
balance
$3,620,054
2,794,188
18,154,886
9,786,033
12,746,102
4,684,580
540,694
1,738,550
6,670,886
11,267,024
705,169
1,538,304
1,704,249
1,206,702
21,941,149
2,235,575
5,109,370
5,870,093
2,265,389
24,272,035
2,992,865
9,866,549
2,797,834
21,349,203
1,730,705
59,673,407
3,621,948
488,584
4,322,957
8,427,026
2,421,629
1,009,582
2,920,962
38,653,123
932,945
7,411,731
307,472,076
Total school
resources
$13,717,856
42,030,353
196,537,481
32,379,270
49,271,900
46,764,566
8,854,032
11,678,456
51,313,477
72,872,966
2,838,982
7,284,402
8,316,258
12,495,126
111,768,385
13,130,725
40,230,614
40,318,399
8,338,300
199,137,046
25,543,757
75,906,733
21,652,032
164,235,948
10,010,548
498,492,342
24,078,066
2,923,537
18,501,246
50,401,779
20,185,177
6,792,860
19,109,177
219,080,984
2,720,090
47,123,990
2,176,036,856
Q
Table B-4. Percent of school district revenues derived from timber-related
sources (average, fiscal years 1 982-83 through 1985-86).
County
Baker
Benton
Clackamas
Clatsop
Columbia
Coos
Crook
Curry
Deschutes
Douglas
GiHiam
Grant
Hamey
Hood River
Jackson
Jefferson
Josephine
Klamath
Lake
Lane
Lincoln
Linn
Malheur
Marion
Morrow
Munomah
Polk
Sherman
Tillamook
Umatilla
Union
Wallowa
Wasco
Washington
Wheeler
Yamhill
Statewide
National
forest
revenue
1.86
0.14
0.47
0
0
0.19
5.01
5.10
2.36
3.36
0
17.25
6.43
2.38
0.89
1.67
0.82
5.55
15.78
2.05
2.55
1.84
0.01
0.33
0.63
0.03
0.01
0
2.20
0.34
0.95
4.70
2.11
0
7.68
0.22
0.99
EOST
0.37
0
0.03
0
0
0
0.76
0
0.11
0
0.03
0.38
0.03
0
0
0.26
0
1.70
5.58
0
0
0
0
0
0.51
0
0
0
0
0.19
0.58
0.52
0.26
0
1.29
0
0.08
WOST
Minimum
contribution
from state Total timber
forests
contribution
0
0
0.64
0.53
5.53
0.49
4.01
6.29
0
4.42
0
10.13
0
0
0
1.13
1.18
0
0.41
0
0
2.42
5.10
4.90
0
0.23
0
0.03
4.26
0
6.30
0
7.12
0.29
0.12
0
0
0
0.05
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.26
0
0.11
1.15
0.19
0
0.14
0
0
0.42
0
3.43
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.23
0
1.21
1.41
0
0.09
0
0
0.19
2.23
1.27
1.03
12.65
4.30
6.60
5.77
9.53
2.47
13.55
0.03
17.63
6.45
3.51
2.07
1.93
1.23
7.50
21.35
4.58
8.80
6.93
0.01
0.69
1.14
0.06
4.68
0
11.93
0.53
1.53
5.22
2.37
0.32
8.97
1.43
2.67
Table B-5. Timber-derived revenues of education service districts (ESD's)
(average for fiscal years 1982-83 through 1985-86).
Total annual
revenue
County
Baker
Benton
Clackamas
Clatsop
Columbia
Coos
Curry
Deschutes
Douglas
Gilliam
Grant
Harney
Jackson
Jefferson
Lake
Lane
Linn
Malheur
Marion
Multnomah
Polk
Sherman
Tillamook
Umatifla
Union
Wallowa
Wasco
Washington
Wheeler
Yamhill
Totalforstate
($)
834,909
1,903,616
9,217,945
2,375,607
1,083,272
2,768,295
920,367
603,115
3,439,039
341,062
856,061
2,308,115
8,946,702
245,713
600,703
8,162,539
3,535,286
835,161
8,114,465
24,263,595
896,468
280,192
1,847,344
4,005,523
2,170,069
2,374,192
1,152,820
4,195,061
505,790
1,896,898
100,679,919
EOST
($)
3,643
% of levy
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,050
0
88
36,889
6,495
0
1,552
40,661
0
WOST
% of levy
0.44
0
0
0
($)
13,174
112,335
360,487
46,786
238,118
94,603
0.69
1.22
15.17
4.32
8.60
10.28
0.17
0
0
468,394
0.03
0
4.31
0
0
13.62
0
0
0
1.03
0
0.28
0
0
91,741
0
0
0.63
6.77
0
0
3.06
0
0
250,165
177,035
43
0.01
0
0
0
0
15,259
18,946
95,670
0.19
0.08
10.67
0
0
0
0
0
5.01
0
0
0
0
0
0
136,525
6,906
14,320
81,228
3,256
0.17
0.66
3.42
0.28
0
0
0
0
9,269
7.39
0
0
0
0
0.22
67,582
0
263,711
13.36
0
2,162,745
0
0
34,240
0.26
1.81
0
0
2.15
Source: Oregon Property Tax Statistics, Statistical Supplement, State of Oregon,
Department of Revenue (1982-86).
Revenues for Linn-Benton ESD are apportioned on the basis of the number of
students within each county.
Table B-6. Timber-derived revenues of rural fire protection districts (RFPD's)
(average, fiscal years 1982-83 through 1985-86).
EOST
% of levy
Total Levy
($)
($)
Baker
Benton
Clackamas
Clatsop
Columbia
Coos
Crook
Curry
Deschutes
Douglas
Gilliam
Grant
Hamey
Hood River
Jackson
Jefferson
Josephine
Klamath
Lake
Lane
Lincoln
Llnn
Malheur
Marion
Morrow
Munomah
Polk
Sherman
Tillamook
Umatllla
Union
Wallowa
Wasco
Washington
Wheeler
Yamhill
Total for state
-i
40,328
932,334
11,966,635
283,682
1,976,113
626,558
79,984
172,208
1,872,149
2,479,890
36,891
27,533
11,865
240,628
3,434,665
308,413
244,263
1,739,413
74,491
2,830,102
707,805
1,626,218
194,494
3,934,976
74,225
12,200,828
520,287
9,380
336,556
541,772
128,930
8,445
402,302
15,175,017
0
507,933
65,747,310
150
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,001
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
WOST
($)
% of levy
0
3,544
40,289
2,104
67,915
0.05
5,181
0
471
0
0.38
0.34
0.74
3.44
0.83
0
0.27
0
0
2,090
0.08
26
125
0.07
0.45
0
0
0
1,916
0
212
6
0
1,155
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
374
1,088
0.16
0.03
0
0
1.20
0
0
0.98
1.15
29
505
28
0
0
0
0
5,153
0.62
0
0.01
0.01
0
0.16
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.01
0.39
0.33
0
0
0
0
0.01
2,932
0
0
27,614
8,174
Total levy
County
Baker
Benton
Clackamas
Clatsop
Columbia
Coos
Crook
Curry
Deschutes
Douglas
Gilliam
Grant
Hamey
HoodRiver
1.21
Jackson
Jefferson
Josephine
Klamath
Lake
Lane
Lincoln
Linn
Malheur
Marion
Morrow
Muftnomah
Polk
Sherman
Tillamook
Umatilla
Union
Wallowa
Wasco
Washington
Wheeler
Yamhill
0.32
Totalforstate
6,551
0
5,546
0.40
0
0
2,056
3,844
0.02
0.74
0
15,413
4.58
0
0.14
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11,031
0
6,133
212,346
Table B-7. Timber-derived revenues of road districts (average, fiscal years
1982-83 through 1985-86).
0.07
0
Source: Oregon Property Tax Statistics, Statistical Supplement, State of Oregon,
Department of Revenue (1982-86).
($)
($)
0
74,287
0
664,570
0
6,896
5,085
0
109,709
4,561
96,859
0
0
0
0
45,093
0
63,339
0
0
157,589
0
396,586
0
0
1,302
0
0
3,869
0
0
0
0
1,838
0
2,115
1,633,697
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
0
41
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
172
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
226
EOST
% of levy
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.01
0
0.04
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.04
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.01
WOST
% of levy
($)
0
0
27
0.04
0
123,751
0
22
0
0
0
12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
567
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
124,379
0
18.62
0
0.31
0
0
0
0.26
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.36
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7.61
Source: Oregon Property Tax Statistics, Statistical Supplement, State of Oregon,
Department of Revenue (1982-86).
Table B-8. Summary of timber-derived property taxes by county (fiscal 1986-87).
County
Baker
Benton
Clackamas
Clatsop
Columbia
Coos*
Forest
land tax
$14,224
375,738
398,341
512,261
410,523
659,754
36,556
153,628
32,361
1,125,178
Crook
Curry
Deschutes
Douglas
Gilliam
0
Grant
43,398
Hamey
6,795
Hood River
44,049
Jackson*
271,593
Jefferson
43,190
Josephine
73,093
Klamath
321,875
Lake
99,238
Lane
1,594,734
Lincoln
664,796
Linn
813,557
Malheur
359
Marion
129,235
Morrow
18,526
Muftnomah
96,449
Polk
296,437
Sherman
0
Tillamook
304,786
Umatilla*
105,377
Union
52,180
Wallowa
53,317
Wasco
32,091
Washington*
343,270
Wheeler
30,504
Yamhill
not available
Total for state
9,157,413
without Multnomah Co. 9,060,964
without Muftnomah,
Washington Cos.
8,717,694
Real
Personal
propertytax
propertytax
$341,860
885,014
1,344,152
4,054,599
2,972,246
1,028,941
526,164
284,001
852,498
2,303,253
$16,334
62,967
88,863
239,541
219,807
259,140
60,124
12,599
123,726
721,595
0
0
250,985
355,805
205,292
1,819,411
30,037
412,314
not available
198,843
11,773,955
1,374,695
3,794,493
8,858
1,002,773
359,340
1,746,372
220,739
29,107
45,498
28,138
372,379
17,116
89,255
not available
49,239
1,012,601
215,511
495,225
894
42,734
29,783
208,309
16,506
Total
EOST
Total
WOST
$24,224
$0
0
615,405
722,545
1,784,494
2,073,785
2,711,059
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,022,446
0
31,943,155
31,820,557
1,636,178
641,948
1,202,166
405,638
415,917
1,416,299
75,586
1,593,607
90,274,617
88,100,889
31,288,951
86,684,590
1,247,351,478
0
0
623,833
29,997
0
0
772
7,077,616
0
39,489
0
0
0
87,418
1,098,129
0
119,721
2,622,923
239,209
0
0
0
0
0
610
0
5,201,517
1,561,126
3,635,092
23,007
33,306
0
0
0
0
0
10,721
335,597
0
122,598
1,220,957
1,510,339
440,955
2,173,728
1,754,639
0
0
216,649
450,217
964,173
267,208
45,577
436,729
92,297
35,000
125,219
23,173
311,287
104,694
51,354
60,594
61,940
26,962
0
531,606
0
167,491
0
45,082
0
0
1,398,211
40,694,684
38,948,312
27,905
5,176,566
4,968,257
3,302,799
3,302,799
38,511,583
4,863,563
3,302,799
* Land taxes paid by forestry firms have not been subtracted from the real property taxes for these counties.
$396,642
1,939,124
2,553,901
6,590,895
5,676,361
4,658,894
661,763
1,074,061
1,038,582
11,227,642
772
362,979
412,509
364,897
3,561,512
113,350
694,383
2,944,798
586,529
19,582,807
3,816,128
8,738,367
Total
levy
$8,798,352
48,450,860
191,483,714
28,494,676
26,735,113
40,234,846
6,626,667
9,498,126
48,181,077
59,503,356
2,919,498
3,499,793
4,337,517
9,463,564
74,090,322
8,049,506
28,028,766
31,832,260
5,038,415
194,660,764
34,454,540
59,843,543
16,464,537
133,406,377
12,348,172
479,226,972
28,358,002
3,120,187
16,020,620
36,611,243
13,976,720
5,484,393
18,640,135
222,652,416
957,346
37,738,471
1,949,230,866
1,470,003,894
38,919
4,411
0
0
Timber-related
contribution
0
0
0
Hackworth, K. and B. Greber. 1988. TIMBER-DERIVED REVENUES: THEIR
IMPORTANCE TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS IN OREGON (FISCAL YEARS
1982-83 TO 1986-87). Forest Research Laboratory, Oregon State University,
Corvallis. Special Publication 17. 20p.
The forestry sector contributes significant revenues to local governments in Oregon. This paper briefly describes public and private forestry
contributions and the relative Importance of these payments to five forms of
local governrnentscounty governments, schools, education service districts, rural fire protection districts, and road districtsIn fIscal years 19821983 to 1985-86. The contribution of property tax payments from the forestry
sector to statewide property taxes in 1986-87 Is also analyzed.
Hackworth, K. and B. Greber. 1988. TIMBER-DERIVED REVENUES: THEIR
IMPORTANCE TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS IN OREGON (FISCAL YEARS
1982-83 TO 1986-87). Forest Research Laboratory, Oregon State University,
Corvallis. Special PublicatIon 17. 20 p.
The forestry sector contributes significant revenues to local governments In Oregon. This paper briefly describes public and private forestry
contributions and the relative Importance of these payments to five forms of
local governmentscounty governments, schools, education service districts, rural fire protection districts, and road districtsin fiscal years 19821983 to 1985-86. The contribution of property tax payments from the forestry
sector to statewide property taxes in 1986-87 Is also analyzed.
As an affirmative action institution that complies with Section
504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Oregon State University supports equal educational and employment opportunity without regard
to age, sex, race, creed, national origin, handicap, marital status, or
religion.
Forestry Publications Office
Oregon State University
Forest Research Laboratory 225
Corvallis OR 97331-5708
Oe on
I
Jnversity
Address Correction Requested
Non-Profit Org.
U.S. Postage
PAID
Corvallis, OR 97331
Permit No. 200